June 21 2021
Jan 22nd 2020 Patient zero in Ontario for Canada
On January 23, the first presumptive case in Canada was admitted to Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto and placed into a negative pressure chamber.[1][2]
The patient, a male in his 50s who travelled between Wuhan and Guangzhou before returning to Toronto on January 22, contacted emergency services following rapid onset symptoms.[3] The presumption of infection in the patient was made after a rapid test was done at Public Health Ontario's Toronto laboratory, and was announced on January 25.[1][2]
volume_up
Here's a more critical look at AA's success rates compared to other programs, along with cost considerations:
Success Rates:
Defining "success" in addiction recovery is challenging, but abstinence rates are a common metric.
AA's success rates are often cited at around 5-10%, though their own surveys suggest a 22% rate for sobriety lasting 20+ years. [Source: HealthLine - "AA and NA Are Popular, but Are They Actually Effective?"(https://americanaddictioncenters.org/rehab-guide/12-step/whats-the-success-rate-of-aa)]
However, critics argue these numbers are self-reported and lack strong scientific backing.
In contrast, some studies show medication-assisted treatment (MAT) programs can achieve abstinence rates of 30-50%. [Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse - "Principles of Medication-Assisted Treatment"(https://www.samhsa.gov/medications-substance-use-disorders/statutes-regulations-guidelines)]
Therapy approaches like CBT can also boast success rates in the 30-40% range for abstinence or reduced drinking. [Source: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism - "Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Alcohol Use Disorder"(https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/)]
Cost:
AA is free to attend, making it a highly accessible resource.
Traditional rehab programs and therapy can be expensive, often requiring insurance coverage.
Medication-assisted treatment can also incur costs for medications and doctor visits.
Here's a table summarizing the key points:
Feature AA MAT Therapy (CBT)
Success Rate (Abstinence) 5-10% (estimates vary) 30-50% 30-40%
Cost Free Varies (insurance, medication) Varies (insurance, therapist)
Approach Spiritual, support groups Medication-assisted reduction of cravings Addressing underlying thought patterns
drive_spreadsheet
Export to Sheets
Remember:
The best approach to treatment is often a combination of these methods, tailored to the individual's needs.
AA can still be a valuable source of support, even if it's not the sole treatment method.
Additional Resources:
The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/)
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (https://www.samhsa.gov/)
share
more_vert
folllow up with comparsion to harm reduction programs, in Toronto, and Canada, with quations in a mark twain style
edit
Show drafts
volume_up
Absolutely! Now, let's get down to brass tacks and compare AA to those newfangled harm reduction programs, all the rage these days. Here in Toronto, and up in the Great White North more generally, these programs are causing quite a stir.
AA vs. Harm Reduction: A Tale of Two Approaches
AA, bless its heart, is like that old horse and buggy – reliable, familiar, and free. But is it the fastest steed in the recovery stable? Now, harm reduction programs, those are more like shiny new automobiles. They focus on pragmatism, you see, like Mark Twain himself tinkering with his steamboat.
Here's the rub, as Twain would say:
Goals: AA sets its sights firmly on total abstinence, that holy grail of sobriety. Harm reduction programs, on the other hand, are more about "taking it one day at a time," like Twain tackling a hefty manuscript. They aim to lessen the risks associated with substance use, aiming for a smoother ride, not necessarily total dismount.
Methods: AA relies heavily on the power of community and that "higher power" business, which some folks find mighty comforting, while others might scoff. Harm reduction programs, like a good toolbox, offer a variety of tools – needle exchange, safer consumption sites, naloxone training – all aimed at keeping folks safe and healthy.
The Cost of the Ride
Now, the sticker price! AA, like a friendly neighbor lending a hand, is entirely free. Harm reduction programs, well, they require some investment, but the returns can be mighty high.
Success Stories? Hold Your Horses!
Measuring success in this realm is a tricky business, friend. AA throws around numbers like 5-10% for long-term sobriety, but some folks call shenanigans. Harm reduction programs are newer on the scene, and their data is still being gathered, but the initial reports are promising in terms of reducing harm and even nudging folks towards treatment.
The Twainian Takeaway
There's no one-size-fits-all answer, just like there's no single perfect steamboat design. AA can be a powerful support system for some, while harm reduction programs offer a more practical approach for others. The best course of action might be a "hodgepodge" (Twain would approve!), a combination of these approaches, tailored to the individual's needs.
Remember: Both AA and harm reduction programs are trying to steer folks away from the dark waters of addiction. It's about finding the right vessel for a safe and healthy journey towards recovery.
The article claims that Christians were denied access to the Bible for 1,000 years, but this is misleading. Here's a more nuanced breakdown:
Early Christianity (1st-4th centuries): There wasn't a single, universally accepted Bible at this point. Different Christian communities used various texts and Gospels.
Council of Nicaea (325 CE): This council standardized Christian practices and established a foundation for the New Testament.
Limited Bible Access (4th-15th centuries): The Church discouraged laypeople from reading the Bible on their own and prohibited translations into vernacular languages. They likely did this to control interpretations and maintain their authority.
Translation Movements (14th-16th centuries): Figures like John Wycliffe and William Tyndale challenged the restrictions and translated the Bible into English, facing persecution for doing so.
Printing Press (15th century onwards): This invention made Bibles more widely available, though the Church still held influence over distribution.
Key Points:
Christians weren't completely denied access to the Bible, but access was restricted for centuries.
The Church's motives for limiting access are complex and debated (control, power, preserving interpretations).
The situation gradually changed with translation movements and the printing press.
Inaccuracy:
The claim of 1,000 years of denial is an exaggeration. Restrictions eased over time.